By: Joe Strupp The Wall Street Journal editorial page, never a huge fan of the Clintons, took what may be its harshest shot yet at Hillary Clinton today, with an editorial that called here everything from a double-talker to a truth-evader.
?In the 1990s, ?Clintonesque? became a by-word for political double-speak. ...,? the editorial began. Later it noted, ?But with another Clinton running as if she's all but a sure thing for the White House, Clintonesque is once again becoming a politically relevant adjective. ... The junior Senator from New York seems increasingly to have adopted her husband's political methods ... The result is that it's impossible to know what she believes about anything. ...?
Much of the editorial focused on the recent MSNBC Democratic presidential debate, moderated by Brian Williams and Tim Russert of NBC News.
?The question of experience came up repeatedly, and Mrs. Clinton wasn't shy about citing her time as first lady as a main qualification to be President. She was less forthcoming about the records of her time in the White House, however,? the Journal opined. ?Mr. Russert asked: ?In order to give the American people an opportunity to make a judgment about your experience, would you allow the National Archives to release the documents about your communications with the President, the advice you gave, because, as you well know, President Clinton has asked the National Archives not to do anything until 2012??
?Mrs. Clinton's initial response was to blame the Archives,? the editorial continued. ?But Mr. Russert asked whether she would lift her husband's ?ban? on releasing their correspondence. ?That's not my decision to make,? was her reply. Apparently we are supposed to believe that the former President would refuse his wife's request to release those records if she asked.?
Other excerpts:
?Senator Clinton was especially clumsy in trying to evade any clear position on New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's proposal to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. When asked why, in her words, it ?makes a lot of sense? to give licenses to illegals, her first answer sounded like an endorsement?
?But after Senator Chris Dodd disagreed, calling a license a ?privilege? not a right, she broke in a moment later to clarify: ?I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it.? This prompted Mr. Dodd to interject that her second answer didn't sound like her first. ...?
?Mrs. Clinton wants to roll to her party's nomination on a tide of ?inevitability? while disguising her real agenda as much as possible. ... [H]illary's challenge is that we've all seen this movie before. And performances like Tuesday's might be enough to convince voters to opt for a candidate who is his own man.?
The entire editorial is available at www.wsj.com, but only to subscribers.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here